Nice analogy.
Don't be fooled by the prominence of contemptible leftist columnists at The New York Times. The real problem is Pinch Sulzberger, not R. W. Apple or Maureen Dowd. The same holds true at The Washington Compost, CBS, NPR, and the rest of them. We hear the voices of marxist reporters doing their work, but it wouldn't be possible if not for the men sitting in the seats of power on the Columbia University Board of Trustees (for the Columbia School of Journalism, which has "trained" so many of these corrupt ideologues) or sit on the boards of Viacom, Disney, TimeWarner, and in other positions of power. These are the real enemies.
We all expect that Dan Rather will soon be replaced by someone even worse. Who makes these decisions?
It is important that they be named. But I suspect that they are immune to criticism in their present positions. Their power comes from their ability to control placement into the mainstream media. As you point out, were these shadowy figures unable to "train" the replacements for the media, the scheme would fall apart. Journalism might then break out.
I am hoping that once the Times is exposed for what it is, and reduced to impotency, the collateral impact will induce the rest of the news business to abandon this mad ideology and forever shun the Columbia School of "Journalism". I think it all hinges now on bringing down the Times. It seems like our best chance yet to turn the tide, and send them backpedalling to defeat.